A recent study finding little difference in the risk of being sued between high quality nursing homes and lousy ones is generating a lot of questions about how to improve quality of care.
The conventional wisdom is that if lawsuits provide a quality-control incentive for providers than lousy nursing homes should be sued far more often than good ones. But when Harvard Medical School researchers sifted through the data they found a weak correlation between quality and litigation.
Among the worst 10 percent of nursing homes they found the risk of litigation ran about 47 percent in a given year. For the best 10 percent of facilities the risk was 40 percent.
Although a seven percent increase is significant, advocates fear it is not nearly enough of an incentive for bad operators to invest the time and money to offer higher quality care.
The reason for the weak correlation is unclear. The researchers went to great lengths to identify the best and worst facilities, using data from the Online Survey, Certification and Reporting system — which covers facility characteristics, staffing ratios and the results of state inspections — and the Minimum Data Set assessing residents’ conditions to determine the best and worse nursing homes. In addition, they convinced five major nursing home chains (for commercial and one non-profit) operating a combined 1,465 nursing homes in 48 states to share information on every claim brought against them over an eight year period.
I’m guessing the data is not detailed enough to estimate the risk of litigation for nursing homes who adopt culture change, but I bet those numbers would be very interesting. Embracing culture change requires allowing for a higher level of risk, which in turn exposes facilities to an increased risk of lawsuits. This would also turn the conventional wisdom on its head.
The important question to ask is what actions can prompt greater commitment to quality care in nursing homes? Consumer education and oversight are important. The past 25 years of tougher federal regulations have made a difference and public reporting quality ratings systems like Medicare’s Nursing Home Compare help direct consumers to better facilities. But advocates say they don’t seem to put enough pressure to turn around the bad apples.
The study’s authors point to a pilot project under way in Arizona, New York and Wisconsin that ties reimbursement to quality measures as a more promising strategy than hiring a lawyer. But it will be several years before the results are in.
What do you think? What role does the culture change movement play in improving the quality of care in nursing homes?


